GAME SUCKS!? I SUE YOU!!!
A disclaimer would probably the only thing changed. Although, it may cause demo creators to be a little more honest without false advertising....or at least that's wishful thinking.
Wait, so this is the point where you call for standards?
All they need to do is put a disclaimer on the demos/previews so they can't be sued. Plus the specific purpose of a demo is to show people what is in the game.
Defective is if the game doesn't work properly. If it does nothing but crash, if features don't function, like multiplayer with the latest Star Trek game. The other is, when the claims made about a product by the company, in no way shape or form resemble the actual product. You're allowed to exaggerate in commercials and publicity; you aren't allowed to outright lie. For example; you cannot say that your product cleans wood, when it in fact harms wood. Similarly, if you explicitly state the ending will not be reduced to option a. b. and c.; and then it does end in option a. b. and c., without you making clear and public the game changed and that it does do so; you should be considered in breach.
Well then the question becomes "when is a game defenctive?". Is it defective if it wasn't what you expected or what you were hoping for? Where's the line on that drawn?
Yeah but Ben, to me it's always been kinda implied that anything shown on a trailer or early demo is subject to change. It's nothing new, it happens all the time, so I've come to accept that as just part of it. And I'm calm, btw. Just saying
That is why suing over the early Mass Effect 3 ending was viable, though the new ending stops that. Still, not everyone has an internet connection so it still breaks this rule.
I understand in the case of Mass Effect 3 where they flat out lied to us about the endings. Still those of us with internet connection have no right to sue as they fixed the issue. Still... The whole "the game will have more endings then just a,b,and c" thing gave us reason before.
Okay then, never mind.
It used to be that if a product was defective you could demand your money back, or exchange it for a product of equal value. It seems people who buy games have completely forgotten this is an option: just get your bloody money back.
Only when they refuse to give you your money back, and are thus in violation of the law; should suing become an option.
Some old games, Not all, right?
99% of these kinda lawsuits are total crap, but that does leave about 1% that do have a legitimate claim.
I didn't know that. Seems like they should've had a regulator on the machine to prevent that.
What I always found interesting about the "McDonald's Hot Coffee case" Is people don't know that the Coffee was kept at such a hot temperature that it melted through the cup causing 3rd degree burns on the woman. She actually just wanted the medical bills covered from the incident. The case was settled out of court and I honest don't know the exact fee she was given.
I think my idea and video was taken the wrong way and definitely I'm to blame for not double checking the video's content before posting.
Yes, I do agree I used the "coffee" incident without researching further on the matter and worst thing about it I had a better example to use and that was the Mass Effect 3 Lawsuit, which it fit more on the subject. I also had a much better explained version of the lawsuit where I show details about the False Advertisement & False representation it supposedly represented but the video had lighting problems and had to be discarded... which I should had not done.
Still, I wanted that the discussion topic of this video was the IF scenario, how crazy would it be if this sort of lawsuits just pass and affect development but apparently I didn't do a great job pointing out this.
I never wanted this to be misleading even with the title, which was supposed to be used more in a "satirical" way of how stupid the lawsuit sound but then again maybe it was chosen in poor judgement.
I like to do this videos for interacting with the community and I do understand that many will agree with my opinion or not, but at the same time I have to be prepared to receive criticism if I didn't deliver the opinion in the right way, so for that if it "offended" you, Sorry.
English, although is a language I can fluently speak, sometimes takes time to explain what I want to express and trying to do this videos in a more improvised way have help me be more fluent and organized my ideas but with this video's reactions, I see I still have a long road to go till I have a more fluent speech.
TL;DR, my videos was for discussion purpose and I delivered the wrong idea and could had mislead some of you and for that I'm sorry, will try to do a better job next time.
p.s: Sorry for the grammar or writing... spanglish still affects my brain... GL;HF!
I'm kind of agree on this one Ben, if you feel it has to be unspotlighted I'm ok with it.
The "McDonald's Hot Coffee" was won by a technicality since that pot of coffee was being kept at a temperature higher than the standard amount. A stupid technicality, but a technicality nonetheless.
This "I pre-ordered this game because the trailer looked good" is what the industry calls "good marketing." It's one thing if the trailer promised something that did not appear, but that's not what happened. The commercial made you think something was awesome, so you, using your wallet, supported it. Many a person have fallen prey to good marketing.
Mr. Hybrid Rain, I believe the scenario of your hypothetical question is not possible. The lawsuit is too frivolous and mundane that it's a waste of time for everyone involved. Damion Perrine should drop the charges and accept that he was suckered in by good marketing before he embarrasses himself.
A few years ago.. the game has only been out for a little more than a year. I know I am just being picky but still.
I'm sorry, you're great and all Hybrid, but why did we promote such a misinformed video to the front page? Standards, ScrewAttack?
It's just your standard, everyday liability lawsuit. Nothing is being challenged, only upheld. I implore anybody who EVER wants to make a blog or video about law to do legitimate research on the subject rather than only looking through the ramblings of 12-year-olds on the internet. It all makes a lot more sense than the crazy kids and conspiracy theorists think.
No they wont win and shouldn't win because old games were shit also but they existed that's something to talk about if shitty games did not exist we would not have shit to say.
its like oh man every game was epic, you guys ever play a crappy game no no man everything is so awesome it would be very old very quick